Two younger Tarzans
How old were the two young actors who did the role of Tarzan when they made this film and what have they done since this film?
share[deleted]
MovieChat Forums > Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes (1984) Discussion > Two younger Tarzans
James,
I know that Danny Potts, who was about 11 or 12 at the time of Greystoke, went on to play in another Hugh Hudson film the next year, about the Revolutionary war. I've seen both films, and he doesn't have a large role in either.
I have no idea if Eric Langlois (the teen) ever did anything else in film. You can always check their links at imdb.
[deleted]
Some time since your message, but ...
Regarding your comments about Eric Langlois, it depends which version you've seen. One version is discreet, as you say, but that was down to editing. There is a version I've seen, which I recorded onto video from TV, which includes scenes/shots in which the teenage Tarzan appears full-frontal naked, running through the forest. These have been deleted from the slightly edited version.
Personally, I think it's the first - and only - time anyone has directed a "story of Tarzan" movie with true honesty and realism. As I've said elsewhere, it is only to be expected that Tarzan as a child would be naked ... who is there to clothe him, the chimps?
But yeah, not many kids would sign up to make a major-release movie knowing that they would be totally naked in all their scenes (their family and friends would surely see it!) and not many parents would agree to it either.
Can you think of it...? Just imagine...
[deleted]
Trying to be helpful here but ...
The only thing I can suggest is checking out the running time. The IMDb main page for the movie gives the run time as 143 mins. I taped the movie from TV onto video, and the run time shows as 130 mins, and, to the best of my knowledge, is not edited. I have recently seen a DVD version on sale on the cover of which I think the run time was shown as 117 mins (if memory serves me well). The scenes in which Eric Langlois appears full frontal occupy around 6 - 8 minutes (on the taped version I have). If these, and the younger boy's scenes have been croppped or edited, that might account for the shorter run-length in that DVD version.
Having said that, does the "run time" shown on the DVD or video covers refer purely to the main feature movie, or does it include trailers (etc), as well?
I haven't seen a version on sale which is explicitly described as either "edited" or "uncut".
My guess is, if you want to see it all, go for the longest-timed version you can find and hope for the best!
Can you think of it...? Just imagine...
[deleted]
I watched the movie for the first time today and I was a bit shocked by the amount of nudity (I wasn't offended or anything, but I wasn't expecting it.) I was more shocked when the youngest Tarzan's ass---- was clearly visible in one shot, yet in another (when the teenage Tarzan is crawling into the treehouse) it looks like his buttcheeks have been glued shut or something. I know they did this for obvious reasons, but still...
share[deleted]
Highly doubtful that you will find pictures of these kids from the film. Since the film was made there has been a major hysterical polemic about "pedophilia" where anything and everything has become suspect. The best example of this is that the film originally had full-frontal nudity of the teen Tarzan which has been edited out of all later versions. In today's world Lambert could probably get away with full frontal - but they would NEVER allow it any more for kids or young teens. This is supposed to be "protecting" them...as if kids have no sexuality or desires... and as if a naked body in the proper context (as in this film) should be unacceptable for ANY reason. This is especially funny, since now that there are computers and webcams - teenagers are sending all kinds of nude shots of themselves to others with no qualms at all...
We should be glad that so much of this film still exists... in fact, the parts with the two younger Tarzans are the most beautiful and successful parts of he film - specifically because their nakedness is totally innocent and unselfconscious. Bravo to the two kids and the director for having achieved such a harmonious result.
[deleted]
My DVD is 146 minutes.
EDIT: Reading the notes in my CD insert, it is mentioned that the scene with Tarzan burning the English flag was cut from the theatrical release. But it was on my DVD.
---
Let's make like Waterworld and close immediately.
But yeah, not many kids would sign up to make a major-release movie knowing that they would be totally naked in all their scenes (their family and friends would surely see it!) and not many parents would agree to it either.
You're speaking from an extremely narrow, American point of view, which is puritanical to the point of hysteria. Nudity is virtually a non-issue for many cultures around the world.
"My brain rebelled, and insisted on applying logic where it was not welcome."share
I've read all you posts!
First, what I have to say is, that Daniel Potts (the younger one) was 11 and Eric Langlois was 15. I write my final work of my study about taboo themes with children and I want to proof, that it isn't so bad, how people think today. I have spoken with some people who had to play a role in a nude and I have spoken also with Daniel Potts. He told me, that it was great, and nobody have punished him or something like that. Their friends were proud on him and nobody changes their attitude about him. Guys, it isn't bad, if somebody does it.
Screamy23, this sounds interesting! You interviewed Daniel Potts? Is it published anywhere? I'd love to read it if I may, as it is a subject I have great interest in.
share